National Fish and Wildlife Foundation - Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan
May 2022
Purpose of this Implementation Plan
The purpose of this Implementation Plan is to provide a concise blueprint of the strategies and
resources required to conserve the Mojave desert tortoise as committed to by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and Department of Defense in the Recovery and Sustainment Partnership (RASP) initiative. The
strategies reflect the view of the many federal, state, academic, and organizational experts that NFWF
consulted during plan development. The intent of this plan is to invest in high-value and high-return
conservation actions to optimize conservation and support the broader recovery effort. Over time the
partners will adapt this plan, subject to the availability of additional funding.
Acknowledgements
The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) gratefully acknowledges the time, knowledge, and
support provided by individuals and organizations that contributed significantly to this Implementation
Plan through input, review, discussion, and content expertise relative to the Mojave desert tortoise and
its habitat. In particular, thanks goes to:
Erin Adams, U.S. Marines Corps (USMC); Linda Allison, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS);
Andrew Archuleta, U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM); Roy Averill-Murray, USFWS; Ray
Bransfield, USFWS; Jeffrey Childers, BLM; Walter Christensen, USMC; Penn Craig, U.S. Army; Brian
Croft, USFWS; David Davis, U.S. Army; Todd Esque, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS); Laura Farwell,
Conservations Science Partners (CSP); Aaron Hebshi, U.S. Navy (USN); Brian Henen, USMC; David
Housman, U.S. Army; Michael King, USMC; Amanda Kissel, CSP; Amy Fesnock Parker, BLM; Angela
Picco, USFWS; Capt. Troy Searcy, USMC; Linda Serret, USMC; Katrina Symons, BLM; Bryan Wallace,
CSP.
About NFWF
NFWF protects and restores the nation’s fish, wildlife, plants and habitats. Chartered by Congress in
1984, NFWF directs public conservation dollars to the most pressing environmental needs and matches
those investments with private contributions. NFWF works with government, nonprofit and corporate
partners to find solutions for the most complex conservation challenges. NFWF has funded more than
5,000 organizations and committed more than $6.8 billion to conservation projects. Learn more at Learn
more at www.nfwf.org.
Cover photo credit: Mojave desert tortoise (Kimberleigh Field/USFWS).
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 2
Background
The Desert Tortoise Recovery Partnership (DTRP) was formed by the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation (NFWF), U.S. Marines Corps, U.S. Army, Department of Defense (DoD), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to coordinate implementation of
strategies and provide additional resources to address the pressing conservation needs of the Mojave
desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) in the West Mojave Desert of southeastern California.
The DTRP was established in September 2020 through Cooperative Agreement number N62473-20-2-
0003 between NFWF and the Department of the Navy (DON) to establish a funding framework between
NFWF and the Marine Corps Air Ground Center (MCAGCC) Twentynine Palms for desert tortoise
conservation under the Recovery and Sustainment Partnership (RASP). This 10-year Implementation
Plan will guide future investments to achieve conservation goals for the Mojave desert tortoise and its
habitat in California’s Mojave Desert, particularly the Western Mojave Recovery Unit.
Conservation Need
Desert tortoises have inhabited the region of the southwestern United States for an estimated 15 to 20
million years, making it one of the oldest extant species in the U.S. The Mojave desert tortoise
(Gopherus agassizii) occurs primarily north and west of the Colorado River in California, Nevada,
Arizona, and Utah, and their population has declined acutely in the past several decades. Between 2004
and 2014, adult desert tortoise densities decreased across the range (Allison and McLuckie 2018). By
2014, the adult population density in the Western Mojave and Eastern Mojave Recovery Units had
decreased by 49 percent and 33 percent from their 2004 levels, respectively. The proportion of juveniles
in these recovery units also declined from 2004 levels.
The Mojave desert tortoise spends up to 95% of its life underground, and is well-suited to endure in a
highly variable and often harsh desert environment (Nagy and Medica 1986; Henen 1997). During winter
and summers of drought years, they reduce above ground activity and remain mostly quiescent in
burrows, reducing their metabolism, water loss and food requirements. They can survive for more than
a year without drinking (Nagy and Medica 1986). The desert tortoise lives in a variety of habitats from
sandy flats to rocky foothills, including alluvial fans, washes and canyons where suitable soils for den
construction or caliche crevices offer refugia from predators and extreme surface weather. It lives from
near sea level to around 3,500 feet in elevation, and is a keystone species of the Mojave Desert
ecosystem, providing refugia for other wildlife and, via digestion, dispersing seeds that help form and
stabilize the vegetative landscape.
Desert tortoises may live 50 or more years in the wild. Their diet consists primarily of wildflowers,
grasses, and cacti. Their large urinary bladder, which allows water resorption to keep them hydrated for
months at a time, also conserves water via excretion of nitrogenous wastes as uric acid. When sufficient
rain falls, tortoises drink from temporary rain pools, including pools in basins they dig in advance. Desert
tortoises may void portions of their bladder contents as a common defensive behavior when attacked or
handled inappropriately, leaving tortoises particularly vulnerable to harsh weather and predation during
periodic droughts.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 3
Desert tortoises require 13 to 20 years to reach sexual maturity, which is when females reproduce by
laying eggs. A clutch typically contains between 1 and 14 eggs, with clutch frequency reduced during
years with low rainfall. Nesting occurs in late spring or early summer, with egg incubation culminating in
hatching during August and September. Tortoises use burrows to escape extreme temperatures, and for
protection from predators such as coyotes, kit fox, ravens, ground squirrels and desert fire ants. The
high mortality of eggs and juveniles, up to 100% per year, severely constrains natural rates of population
and species recovery. Consequently, it is critical that conservation actions include substantial and
sustained efforts to increase egg production and recruitment, and decrease juvenile mortality for
species recovery to succeed.
Tortoise densities vary considerably throughout their range. In the Western Mojave Recovery Unit,
many areas have densities below 3.9 adults per square kilometer, which is considered the minimum
tortoise density for viable reproduction (Allison and McLuckie 2018). Mojave desert tortoise populations
have declined sharply in association with a variety of changes to their habitat in the past century. The
many, ongoing threats that increase tortoise mortality and habitat loss include urbanization, large-scale
renewable energy projects, proliferation of roads and highways, off-highway vehicle (OHV) activity,
predation by subsidized predators (e.g., ravens and coyotes) habitat invasion by non-native invasive
plant species and wildfire.
A primary threat to Mojave desert tortoise populations is increasing habitat loss and degradation, which
are driven by a wide range of human activities and climate-related stressors (USFWS 2011, Abella and
Berry 2016). One factor contributing to reduced habitat quality and connectivity is OHV activity, which
can degrade tortoise habitat by compacting soils, reducing infiltration, spreading invasive plants, and
harming vegetation, thus reducing suitable habitat for tortoise burrows as well as forage (Lovich and
Bainbridge 1999). Areas in the West Mojave with heavy OHV use have been found to host fewer
tortoises and tortoises with lower body mass than comparable undisturbed areas (Bury and Luckenback
2002; Berry et al. 2014).
Highway and paved road mortality contributes substantially to range-wide declines of the desert
tortoise. Road effects deplete populations, fragment habitat and populations, isolate populations
physically and genetically, subsidize predator populations, and provide human access that supports
collection, vandalism, and poaching in remote areas (Boarman and Sazaki 1996; USFWS 2011; Nafus et
al. 2013; Peaden et al. 2015).
Current Conservation Context
The Mojave population of the desert tortoise was listed as Threatened under the federal Endangered
Species Act on April 2, 1990. In 1994, the USFWS and others published a recovery plan for the Mojave
desert tortoise, proposed Desert Wildlife Management Areas (DWMA), and designated critical habitat
where the species occurred in four states. The 2011 revision of the Recovery Plan assigned the tortoise a
recovery priority number of 12C. The 12C category means that a moderate degree of threat and low
potential of recovery existed for the Mojave desert tortoise based on: “a) a moderate degree of threat,
which, although increased since 1994, does not place the species at imminent risk of extinction; b) a low
potential for recovery, adjusted based on current uncertainties about various threats and our ability to
manage them; c) listed population below the species level; and d) potential conflict with development or
other forms of economic activity.” The recovery priority number was changed to 11C to reflect its new
status as a distinct species after the Sonoran Desert tortoise was rigorously described as a distinct
species (Murphy et al. 2011).
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 4
In October 2020, the California Fish and Game Commission granted temporary, state level, endangered
species status to the Mojave desert tortoise, and is considering the species as a candidate for
permanent listing as endangered.
In addition to describing the ecological needs of and threats to the Mojave desert tortoise, the USFWS’
2011 Revised Recovery Plan conveys the suite of conservation actions necessary to recover the species.
This Recovery Plan is the foundation for conservation strategies that appear in biological opinions
related to the RASP and in this Implementation Plan. Due to the species’ federally threatened status,
actions with a federal nexus and which may impact Mojave desert tortoises and their habitat, must
involve consultation with the USFWS under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
In 2016, BLM’s Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) identified areas of critical
environmental concern (ACECs), which are BLM areas within public lands where special management
attention is required to protect and prevent irreparable damage to important historic, cultural, or scenic
values, fish and wildlife resources or other natural systems of processes, or to protect life and safety
from natural hazards (BLM 2016). For resource management purposes, ACECs have replaced the
DWMAs identified in the Recovery Plan.
Many public and non-profit conservation entities are committed to recovering the Mojave desert
tortoise. The USFWS’ Desert Tortoise Recovery Office (DTRO) explicitly addresses ongoing population
declines and focuses on research, monitoring, recovery plan implementation, and associated recovery
permitting. The DTRO was established based on recommendations from the General Accounting Office's
2002 audit of desert tortoise recovery actions, and from the October 2004 Desert Tortoise Recovery
Plan Assessment’s guidance to improve coordination among entities working to recover the Mojave
desert tortoise.
This Implementation Plan aims to use significant, existing recovery plans to describe a road map to
invest future resources across jurisdictional boundaries consistent with these actions. Local entities seek
funds to implement the vision of the Revised Recovery Plan, and the DTRP aims to pool and streamline
investments to accelerate recovery of the species. This approach aims to address ongoing challenges to
recovery that stem from insufficient information on the effectiveness of management actions and the
broad geographic distribution of threats to the species (Averill-Murray et al., 2012). By prioritizing
conservation activities and evaluating their effectiveness over many focal areas across the species’ range
(Figure 1), in a framework that encourages a cross-jurisdictional approach, the DTRP is designed to
optimize the impact of the conservation investments.
The climate and expanse of the Mojave Desert helped the development of Department of Defense
(DoD) weapons testing and training sites in the region in the second half of the 20th century. Today, each
of those military installations are dedicated to ensuring compliance with environmental regulations,
including recovering the Mojave desert tortoise under the Endangered Species Act. The installation
tortoise programs have driven numerous basic and applied scientific discoveries, including sequencing
the tortoise genome (Tollis et al. 2017), using genomics to identify landscape effects upon the species’
distribution (Sanchez-Ramirez et al. 2018), developing species distribution models to identify climate
refugia and risks of climate warming (Barrows et al. 2016), quantifying temperature-dependent sex
determination risks to reproductive success and long-term demography (Nagy et al. 2016) and
evaluating risks and successful methods to augment tortoise populations via head-starting (Nagy et al.
2015a,b, 2016). These installations have also quantified predation risks from subsidized predators (e.g.,
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 5
coyotes [Esque et al. 2010] and ravens [Nagy et al. 2015a,b]), and advanced methods to control such
predators (e.g., oiling raven eggs in nests).
These programs continue today and offer numerous opportunities to drive scientific advances, such as
climate change risks to demographic stability and species recovery (Nagy et al. 2016). The Environmental
Affairs Division recovery and compliance actions at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center
(MCAGCC), Twentynine Palms ensures environmental compliance, and actively leads advances via many
recovery actions, including population augmentation (head-starting and translocation) of desert
tortoises. The U.S. Army’s National Training Center and Ft. Irwin Directorate of Public Works
Environmental Division implements tortoise population augmentation research and efforts (head-
starting and translocation), sustains fencing that minimizes road-kill of desert tortoises, protects other
listed species (e.g., Lane Mountain milk-vetch) and implements other environmental compliance.
Environmental Support within Operations and Management at the Naval Air Weapons Station China
Lake implements tortoise conservation and addresses other wildlife issues. At Edwards Air Force Base
(EAFB), the 412th Civil Engineers Group’s Environmental Management Division designs and implements
innovative strategies for head-starting tortoises and controlling subsidized predators (e.g., oiling of
raven eggs).
State agencies in California actively implement conservation efforts for Mojave desert tortoise recovery.
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is advancing design of tortoise exclusionary
fencing and road crossing infrastructure that may reduce vehicle strike mortalities and other road
effects (Hunt 2014; Caltrans 2020). The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) issues permits
for research and recovery purposes, and determines the species conservation status at the State level.
The California State Parks also engage in Mojave desert tortoise conservation, including restoration
grantmaking, through their Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Division.
Other federal agencies, including the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS), are active in Mojave desert tortoise recovery. The BLM is an indispensable federal partner in
species recovery as a land manager and cross-jurisdictional planner. In the West Mojave, the BLM
manages large swaths of this land for multiple uses such as conservation, power transmission, mining,
mineral extraction, renewable energy, natural gas and petroleum transmission, and recreation. The BLM
is currently implementing the West Mojave Route Network Project (WMRNP; BLM 2019b), a travel
management planning effort covering 9.24 million acres in California’s West Mojave Desert that
supplements the 2006 West Mojave Plan. The agency’s California Desert District manages 3.1 million
acres in the WMRNP planning area, which includes much of the tortoise’s critical habitat areas in the
Western Mojave Recovery Unit. The DRECP sets disturbance caps and mitigation actions for activities
occurring in ACECs on BLM-managed lands.
The BLM has also played a critical role in developing a road map for native seed resources for the
Mojave Desert through its chairmanship of the Plant Conservation Alliance (PCA) Federal Committee,
which implements the National Seed Strategy for Rehabilitation and Restoration (NSS). In support of the
NSS, the Mojave Desert Native Plant Program published a five-year strategy for implementing the NSS
across the Mojave Desert ecoregion beginning in 2022 (MDNPP 2021). The BLM also leads regulatory
permitting for disturbance activities on BLM lands, and for such activities that impact the tortoise,
collects and manages mitigation funding. Although the DTRP considers only proactive funding for
Mojave desert tortoise recovery, it also considers the significant, ongoing mitigation resources provided
to recovery efforts, such as corvid control.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 6
Meanwhile, a substantial USGS focus is monitoring and scientific research aimed to better understand
the habitat needs of, threats to and impacts of recovery actions on the species. USGS scientists are key
partners in identifying and evaluating priority recovery actions range wide.
As tortoise populations continue to decline (see Allison and McLuckie 2018, and references therein),
federal partners have sought new ways to collaborate to advance species recovery. In June 2018, the
DoD and Department of the Interior (DOI) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to establish
the Recovery and Sustainment Partnership (RASP) to develop species conservation and recovery
initiatives and increase flexibility for military missions (DoD and DOI 2018a). The Mojave desert tortoise
is one priority species DoD and DOI identified for recovery through the RASP. DoD and the USFWS
developed a species action plan (DoD and DOI 2018b; DoD and DOI 2019), with the goal of “[identifying]
actions required by DoD and the USFWS to reduce the regulatory burden on DoD for the management
of the target species and its designated critical habitat, as part of an overall effort to accelerate the
recovery of the desert tortoise in partnership with other federal and state agencies, and other partners.”
Subsequently, the USFWS is conducting consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act to
address future training impacts and effective, long-term and coordinated DoD contributions to desert
tortoise recovery. Installations may contribute funding to support RASP activities as part of this
partnership.
Federal and state engagement in recovery efforts is complemented by that of several conservation
organizations, including the Amargosa Conservancy, the Desert Tortoise Preserve Committee, Friends of
El Mirage, Friends of Jawbone, Mojave Desert Land Trust, Preservation Ranch and Transition Habitat
Conservancy. The Desert Tortoise Council, an organization of desert tortoise researchers, NGOs, and
government agencies, provides a significant forum and guidance to advance tortoise conservation
biology, and convene stakeholders to disseminate the latest conservation strategies.
Another important source of support for desert tortoise conservation is mitigation funding resulting
from development activities in the Mojave Desert. NFWF’s Impact-Directed Investment Accounts (IDEA)
division manages mitigation funds to support raven monitoring and management, and has for several
years funded research on the interaction between desert tortoises and ravens in California deserts at
the Joshua Tree National Park and Pinto Mountains CHU; Mojave National Preserve, Piute-Fenner and
Ivanpah CHU; Superior-Cronese CHU and Fort Irwin’s southeast conservation area; Chemehuevi CHU;
Ord-Rodman CHU; and the Fremont-Kramer CHU (including a portion within Edwards Air Force Base and
Desert Tortoise Research Natural Area). NFWF IDEA funds this work in consultation with the Renewable
Energy Action Team (consisting of CDFW, California Energy Commission, the BLM, and USFWS) to
implement a regional raven management plan to reduce predation by ravens on the desert tortoise in
California deserts. Funding for implementation of the regional raven management plan is provided to
and administered by NFWF IDEA as mitigation for impacts to the desert tortoise in the California desert.
Since this funding source for raven management exists, this Plan does not propose to direct additional
non-mitigation funding resources toward raven management.
The remarkable magnitude of federal resources contributes substantially to advancing and
implementing recovery actions for the Mojave desert tortoise. These strengths are bolstered by state
and non-profit resources, but effective conservation requires greater coordination and capacity to
accelerate tangible recovery impacts. With funding strategically focused on achieving measurable, high-
value conservation benefits, the Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan can reinforce
these partners in advancing recovery of this American desert icon.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 7
Implementation Plan Objectives
The ultimate goal of this Plan is to support the Recovery Plan’s de-listing criteria via coordination and
collaboration among governmental and non-governmental recovery partners. While this Plan is initially
designed for a 10-year implementation time-frame, the objectives addressed are medium-term, 5-year
objectives. It is the intention that long-term 10-year objectives will be added to the plan around the 5-
year mark. Through priority strategies, this Plan will guide investments in projects that optimize habitat
and demographic improvements for Mojave desert tortoises in California’s western Mojave Desert
(Table 1). This plan is not an exhaustive list of recovery actions, but it addresses key drivers of
population declines.
To reduce mortality rates due to vehicle strikes, this Plan invests in the installation of 32 miles of
exclusion fencing along priority highways in the western Mojave Desert within the first five years.
These fences will be accompanied by flood control culverts or other underpass or overpass structures
that reduce population isolation by allowing tortoises to pass safely under or over roadways. These road
improvement structures reduce tortoise mortality and increase population connectivity and gene flow.
Installing barrier fencing may enable repopulation of road-effect zones, where populations have been
significantly depleted along road mortality hot spots (Nafus et al. 2013, Peaden et al. 2015). Tortoise
densities can be much lower adjacent to unfenced highways compared to areas further away from
highways (Peaden et al. 2015), and juvenile tortoise home ranges decrease in size, while carapace
temperatures increase, with proximity to roads (Peaden et al. 2017). Prudently placed highway fencing
could enable nature-assisted restoration of these areas as desirable tortoise habitat, and thus expand
the total habitat available to tortoises.
To mitigate impacts from unauthorized OHV use, this Plan invests in the marking and vertical mulching
of unauthorized OHV routes, to result in the incorporation of an additional 75,000 acres within
defensible polygons in the first five years. Defensible polygons are contiguous tracks of land where
human intrusion and disturbance can be greatly diminished or eliminated through successful OHV route
closures, land protection, and restoration. This will be achieved by marking and signing unauthorized
OHV routes, and likely involve obscuring routes using vertical mulching. Vertical mulching can increase
compliance with route closures through placement of structures such as live vegetation, rocks, dead
shrubs, and woody material on the closed roadway surface to obscure the route. When vertical
mulching is not successful in closing an unauthorized route, fencing or other physical barriers may be
necessary to achieve closure.
To further reclaim and rehabilitate tortoise habitat, this Plan will support the protection and
restoration of 250,000 acres of habitat within the focal areas in the first five years. To protect tortoise
habitat and create larger continuous tracts of tortoise habitat, the Plan supports the purchase of
inholdings and the establishment of conservation easements that remove habitat from future
development or mitigate losses of habitat elsewhere. Restoration activities such as soil remediation,
weed management, and revegetation with native plants, may be required to restore natural functions to
closed routes and other patches of habitat. Degraded habitat provides areas less suitable for foraging,
breeding and resting (Abella and Berry 2016), which likely leads to a decline in tortoise health and
reproductive success. To support habitat restoration activities, this Plan will invest in seed collection and
propagation where native seed banks have been depleted through competition with non-native plants.
Population augmentation via translocation or head-starting to zones depauperate of tortoises could
bolster tortoise populations. Head-starting involves raising young tortoises in protected areas until they
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 8
reach sizes that are less vulnerable to threats, such as predation by ravens, before release to the wild.
DoD has funded head-starting research and recovery efforts at MCAGCC, Ft. Irwin and EAFB, with
MCAGCC’s Tortoise Research and Captive Rearing Site continuing numerous analyses, including
demographic monitoring of released, headstarted tortoises. Within all focal areas in the Western
Mojave Recovery Unit, desert tortoise densities are below a minimum viable density threshold of 3.9
adults per square kilometer (USFWS 1994). Below this threshold, reproductive potential and survival
diminish, genetic diversity is lost, and local extirpation is likely without intervention. Additionally, high
predation on juveniles compromises recruitment of small tortoises to reproductive size classes.
Augmenting depleted populations should bolster adult reproduction and juvenile recruitment into adult
populations.
Finally, community outreach performed in tandem with habitat improvements can convey more success
than improvements alone. Information and education campaigns can build public support for and
involvement in the recovery of the Mojave desert tortoise. An educated public is more likely to be aware
of how their actions can negatively impact tortoises. Through education and outreach initiatives, this
Plan hopes to reduce human subsidies of predator communities like ravens that prey on young tortoises
and severely reduce recruitment. Outreach and additional staffing (not funded by NFWF) for law
enforcement or visitor contact rangers can also increase compliance with OHV route designations and
aid in the protection of tortoises and their habitat within defensible polygons.
Environmental and Cultural Clearance Needs
Conservation activities are subject to many critical environmental and cultural compliance
requirements, like those defined by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Planning for smooth
compliance is key to accomplishing tangible benefits for the Mojave desert tortoise. There are several
existing authorizations for the work implemented under this Plan. The West Mojave Route Network
Project (WEMO) amended the California Desert Conservation Area Plan and resulted from an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS; BLM 2019a). That document analyzed all of the restoration and
conservation activities proposed under this Plan. The EIS also addresses compliance with the
Endangered Species Act (ESA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and Clean Air Act (CAA).
Projects activities that have not been analyzed in the WEMO will need to obtain the appropriate
compliance documentation as part of project implementation prior to work commencing. This process
benefits incredibly from early planning, which improves the best management of resources. Many
implementing organizations are experienced in completing these legal requirements. We expect funding
applications will clearly and completely document the applicants’ environmental authorizations for their
projects. This Plan budgets funds to assist grantees in completing these compliance requirements as
part of their projects.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 9
Table 1. Desert tortoise RASP objectives in the Plan’s first five years
Short-term habitat objectives
Construct 32 miles of desert tortoise exclusion fencing along high-priority highways in the western
Mojave Desert
Rehabilitate unauthorized routes of travel in the identified recovery focal areas to incorporate an
additional 75,000 acres within defensible polygon units
Protect and restore up to 250,000 acres of habitat in identified recovery focal areas
Medium-term species objectives
The focal area populations have an increasing rate of adult survival, reproductive success, and
juvenile recruitment that is statistically greater than those measured at reference sites outside focal
areas for a period of 5 years
Desert tortoise density in the focal areas is above minimum viable density (3.9 tortoises per square
kilometer) for a period of 5 years
The proportion of juvenile desert tortoises in focal area populations is statistically greater than those
measured in reference sites outside of focal areas for a period of 5 years
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 10Geographic Focus
The RASP Implementation Plan focuses recovery actions in specific focal areas in the western Mojave
Desert so resources can provide the greatest benefit to recovery of the desert tortoise (Figure 1). These
focal areas are predominantly large sections of public lands managed by the BLM, are within designated
critical habitat, and are located near DoD installations participating in the RASP. Protecting these focal
areas would benefit from efforts to reduce encroachment on military missions. Relevant characteristics
of each foal area are described in Table 2.
The RASP focal areas support landscape-scale connectivity and minimize overlap with grazing allotments
and open OHV recreation areas, thereby reducing conflict with RASP objectives. Consequently, we
expect that these focal areas will respond more readily to conservation investments due to existing
conservation designations and their habitat and population characteristics. However, road crossing
improvement projects will be supported across a broader geography, targeting priority road sections
throughout the western Mojave Desert (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Mojave Desert Tortoise RASP Implementation Plan focal areas and priority highway fencing
segments in the Western Mojave Recovery Unit. Priority fencing segments include: (1) I-40 Daggett to
Newberry Springs, CA; (3) I-40 National Trails West of Pigsah, CA; (5) I-40 West of Van Winkle Wash to E
of Essex Rd, CA; (7) I-15 North of Barstow, CA; (8) I-40 North of Black Ridge, CA; (11) I-40 Old Dad
Mountains, CA; and (13) I-40 Kelbaker Rd, CA.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 11Table 2. Conservation focal areas
Focal Area Description
Superior-Cronese This region includes Black Mountain and Coolgardie. Black Mountain is
West dominated by the Black Mountain Wilderness area, a volcanic area that is
largely protected and has low usage except during the fall hunting season.
Landowners are primarily Federal agencies, state agencies or conservation
organizations. This area has received recent restoration and the habitat is fair
to good. Coolgardie is a diverse area with several listed or petitioned species
including Lane Mountain milk-vetch, Joshua tree, and Mohave ground squirrel.
It is comprised of BLM, DOD, and private ownership. This area is also impacted
by the urban interface and mining. Subsidized predation, particularly by
common ravens, is a major management issue. Restoration efforts have been
challenging here due to land control issues. Continued intense monitoring will
be required to maintain quality, safe habitat.
Superior-Cronese This region includes Calico Mountain and Cronese Lake. Calico Mountain
East includes BLM, DOD, and private holdings. Mining and exploration occur in this
area, while the primary threats are unauthorized OHV use and illegal cannabis
cultivation. Subsidized predation, particularly by common ravens, is a major
management issue. The overall condition of the habitat is poor, and restoration
is challenging due to the mixed ownership and urban interface. Cronese Lake is
comprised of multiple ownerships, but primarily BLM and DoD managed lands.
This area is primarily used for power and other utility transmission. Habitat
degradation occurs from unauthorized OHV use and exploration. The subregion
is remote and lends itself to restoration activity with islands of roadless areas
and decent habitat. Areas closer to I-15 are impacted by travelers and trash.
Fremont-Kramer This region includes Fremont Peak and Kramer Hills. Land owners in Fremont
Peak include the BLM, CDFW, Wildlands Inc., and Transition Habitat
Conservancy. The primary threat in this area is unauthorized OHV use and
cannabis cultivation. The overall condition of the habitat is fair to poor; drought
has caused a severe lack of water and deteriorating vegetation. Kramer Hills is
pockmarked with multiple ownership, primarily BLM and private, with some
contiguous parcels of DoD on the east side. This area is heavily influenced by
the urban interface and private cannabis cultivation. Subsidized predation,
particularly by common ravens, is a management issue more acute here than in
other focal areas. The habitat in this area, where protected from hazards, is
good, while the overall area is dissected with private parcels that inhibit
scalable restoration.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 12Ord-Rodman West This region is located east of Hwy 247 and is dominated by electric and natural
gas transmission lines and contains an active grazing allotment. The primary
threats in this area are unauthorized OHV use and cannabis cultivation.
Subsidized predation, particularly by common ravens, is a major management
issue. Recent translocations have increased tortoise density in this area, and the
habitat is fair to good. The Ord Mountains typically get more rain and winter
moisture than other focal areas.
Ord-Rodman East The region is dominated by two large wilderness areas, Newberry Mountain
and Rodman Mountain. This area is part of an active grazing allotment and is
susceptible to unauthorized OHV use. Its proximity to the Johnson Valley OHV
Area is contributing to this use, and it will take time determine the
effectiveness of OHV fencing. Subsidized predation, particularly by common
ravens, is a major management issue. Like the Ord Mountains, this area has
seen greater than average moisture and the habitat is in fair to good shape.
Along with Ord-Rodman South, this area was a recipient site for translocated
desert tortoises from MCAGCC’s western expansion area, which supported
tortoise recovery by augmenting tortoise populations in this focal area.
Ord-Rodman South This region includes East Ord Mountain and has conditions similar to those of
the Ord-Mountain West focal area. Subsidized predation, particularly by
common ravens, is a major management issue. Along with Ord-Rodman East,
this area was a recipient site for translocated desert tortoises from MCAGCC’s
western expansion area, which supported tortoise recovery by augmenting
tortoise populations in this focal area.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 13Priority Implementation Strategies
NFWF will fund the following implementation strategies over a 10-year period to support the short- and
medium-term objectives described in this Plan. The results chain in
Figure 2 provides a model for how the collective strategies are anticipated to contribute to the identified
conservation objectives.
Strategy 1. Mojave desert tortoise habitat improvement
1.1 Establish defensible polygons of desert tortoise habitat – Expanding existing or conserving new
tracts of Mojave desert tortoise habitat via route restoration and land protection
1.1.1 Land acquisitions and conservation easements – Acquire land acquisitions or conservation
easements within focal areas, with priority given to inholdings that are strategically important
for moving restoration actions forward, which would connect multiple existing conservation
lands within critical habitat areas, or which are particularly cost-effective. A funding mechanism
for long-term stewardship of acquired lands or conservation easements should be included in
this strategy.
1.1.2 OHV route signage – Install signs on unauthorized routes to indicate route closures. Signs
may also include education material to encourage compliance.
1.1.3 Vertical mulching – Conduct restoration of unauthorized routes using vertical mulching to
restore habitat and discourage incursions into tortoise habitat.
1.1.4 Physical barrier installation – Install physical barriers on unauthorized routes where
signage and vertical mulching have been unsuccessful.
1.1.5 Community outreach and education – Build support for, understanding of, and compliance
with authorized use of off highway vehicles to reduce human intrusion into desert tortoise
habitat, maintain the integrity of existing habitat, and restore degraded habitat. Education
programs can also reduce instances of mortality, poaching, and human subsidies of predators on
tortoises.
1.1.6 Increase visitor contact staffing to reduce non-compliance with route and habitat
restoration closures – Fund visitor contact ranger positions to educate land users on the
purposes of route and habitat closures. While no funding for this strategy will come through
NFWF, other RASP partners intend to support this strategy.
1.2 Improve desert tortoise habitat on protected lands– Restoring degraded tortoise habitat on
defensible habitat space
1.2.1 Habitat restoration: Improve native species habitat function and health for desert tortoise
within defensible polygons or along closed OHV routes. Priority actions may include de-
compacting unauthorized routes, invasive plant control, native seeding and outplanting to help
native plants reestablish.
1.2.3 Increase native seed banks – Support native seed collection to increase seed stocks for
restoration and reclamation work to facilitate native seeding/outplanting restoration efforts.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 14Strategy 2. Support road crossing improvements
2.1 Construct or repair exclusion fencing along roads – Construct or repair exclusion fencing along
paved road “hotspots,” and consequently reduce mortality of desert tortoises. Maintain fencing
once installed or repaired.
2.2 Install or improve culverts, underpasses or overpasses – Install or improve culverts or other
underpass or overpass structures along exclusion fencing to mitigate effects of population
fragmentation and allow for tortoises to circumvent dangerous movement across highways.
Maintain culverts, underpasses, and overpasses once installed or improved.
Strategy 3. Augment depleted Mojave desert tortoise populations
3.1 Head-starting and reintroduction – Support efforts to obtain adult tortoises for progeny, captive-
rearing of offspring, and reintroduction of young tortoises to appropriate locations that are
sufficiently protected, maintained, and monitored to augment existing populations.
3.2 Translocation – Translocate wild tortoises from construction or other disturbed sites into
appropriate locations that are sufficiently protected, maintained, and monitored to augment
existing populations. While no funding for this strategy will come through NFWF , some RASP
partners intend to support this strategy.
Strategy 4. Increase capacity for project implementation and data management
4.1 Create a RASP Coordinator position – Create a dedicated position to coordinate partners and
projects to ensure efficient delivery of on-the-ground recovery projects, and coordinate RASP
partner meetings and reports to be funded annually for the duration of this Recovery and
Sustainment Partnership.
4.2 Support regulatory compliance – Identify or create staff capacity to coordinate regulatory
compliance for recovery actions.
4.3 Support data collection and data management – Identify or create capacity to fulfill data
collection and management needs to meet federal agency and RASP requirements and support
monitoring initiatives.
Strategy 5. Monitoring and Adaptive Management
5.1 Species monitoring – Support Mojave desert tortoise monitoring and analysis to inform progress
towards medium-term population objectives and inform conservation decision-making.
5.2 Improve understanding of recovery action effectiveness – Support applied research and
effectiveness monitoring to elucidate impacts of priority management actions and improve
tortoise recovery efforts.
5.3 Host annual stakeholder meetings – Host annual RASP partner meetings to review progress
towards Plan goals, review and integrate any lessons learned or relevant effectiveness monitoring
results, and adaptively manage implementation by identifying priorities for the next annual
request for proposals (RFP).
5.4 Assess and revise Plan in years 4 and 8 – Assess implementation of this Plan in years 3, 5, and 8
and make revisions as needed to adaptively manage partnership priorities.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 15Figure 2. Results chain depicting the relationship of various strategies (yellow hexagons) within the Implementation Plan to each other, to the objectives (blue boxes) and ultimately to a goal for Mojave desert tortoise recovery (green ovals)
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 16Adaptive Management
Evaluation of project reporting, monitoring, and other research can inform how to better direct the
type, scale and location of conservation actions to maximize benefits to Mojave desert tortoise
populations. The National Research Council defines adaptive management as:
Adaptive management [is a decision process that] promotes flexible decision making that can be
adjusted in the face of uncertainties as outcomes from management actions and other events
become better understood. Careful monitoring of these outcomes both advances scientific
understanding and helps adjust policies or operations as part of an iterative learning process.
For this Plan to improve recovery of the Mojave desert tortoise, it must include a process for adaptively
managing partnership goals and strategies, with a commitment to plan, act, evaluate, and adjust
partnership strategies over the life of the plan.
Plan: Prioritize and identify data needs Act: Implement priority conservation actions
Develop a plan to collect information to assist Resources are shepherded and projects are
in prioritizing conservation actions implemented
• Short-term metrics (ex. # mi of fence • RFP priorities come from this Plan and
installed, # routes closed) subsequent adjustments
• Implementation lessons-learned
• Tortoise monitoring data
• Project effectiveness monitoring (ex. Evaluate: Analyze effectiveness of the action
fence longevity, OHV closure Monitoring, Modeling, and Research
persistence)
• Monitor range-wide population
metrics long-term
Adjust: Shift or change priorities based on • Conduct population demographics
implementation outcomes monitoring at project sites
Engage stakeholders to consider any changes • Annual partner review of metrics and
to objectives or prioritization of actions monitoring data to determine if certain
types of projects need to be
• Modify RFP based on learnings from
reprioritized in next RFP.
project reviews.
• Collect lessons learned from grantees
• Ensure that any changes are
through project reporting
compatible with the regulatory
• Track implementation metrics and
environment.
assess subsequent long-term
• Revise Plan on a 3-year cycle subject
sustainability of actions such as fence
to funding availability
installation and vegetative restoration
• Analyze the impact of the
implemented conservation actions
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 17Key components of the adaptive management process include, but are not limited to:
Plan: Prioritize and identify data needs
NFWF’s robust, science-based grantmaking process is designed to collect information about funded
project to support effective decision-making. The Foundation uses a reliable, transparent and
transferable process to identify which activities are likely to be successful and have the largest
conservation impact. NFWF’s rigorous science and evaluation framework ensures that the Foundation's
efforts will have the highest possible value and lasting effect.
For example, the Foundation provides a list of standardized metrics on which grantees may choose to
report to capture the achievements of their project. At the Full Proposal stage, these metrics provide a
roadmap for setting priorities, establishing outcomes, and determining the projects with the greatest
opportunity for impact and success. At the reporting stage, they enable the Foundation to gauge
progress on individual grants and ensure greater consistency between the monitoring data provided by
multiple grant projects to show impact at the partnership scale.
Act: Implement priority conservation actions
In this stage, project resources are shepherded, and projects are implemented.
Evaluate: Analyze effectiveness of the actions
Monitoring, modeling, and research are key components of adaptive management and are central to
the Plan. Strategies include:
• Effectiveness monitoring at project sites: Monitor and evaluate population demographics and
other effectiveness measures at project sites
• Grantee Project Reporting: Review and assess grantee project reports, especially lessons
learned, as tools for evaluating project effectiveness and impact
• Evaluate lessons learned from projects funded in previous rounds of grantmaking.
• When available, new data on Mojave desert tortoise populations specific to partnership-funded
projects as well as range wide population trends will be used to inform RFP priorities.
Adjust: Shift or change priorities based on implementation outcomes
In the first few years of Plan implementation, adaptive management will focus primarily on adjusting
RFP priorities as necessary based on results collected in effectiveness monitoring. Annual stakeholder
meetings and RFP drafting meetings will facilitate incorporation of lessons learned and allow for
priorities to evolve on an annual basis.
A formal Plan assessment may be conducted periodically, subject to funding availability. The
assessments evaluate the initiative’s implementation progress, conservation progress, and long-term
sustainability of progress, highlight broader impacts of our grantmaking, and describe lessons learned.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 18Risk Assessment
Risk is an uncertain event or condition which, if it occurs, could have a negative effect on a partnership’s desired outcome. We assessed seven risk event categories to determine the extent to which they could impede progress towards our
stated recovery strategies and goals during the next 10 years. Below, we identify potential risks and describe strategies to minimize or avoid those risks, where applicable.
CATEGORY RATING RISK DESCRIPTION MITIGATING STRATEGIES
Partners have drafted a plan to minimize impacts of solar power development to tortoises, and this Plan focuses on
Expansion of solar energy production and military installations into new areas may put increased pressure
critical habitat units that would be excluded from solar energy development. Military partners are engaged in the
Economic Risks Moderate on Mojave desert tortoise habitat. An increase in the establishment of mining claims for locatable or
RASP to help direct resources to priority recovery actions. If new mining claims continue to grow, the BLM may be
saleable mineral resources could pose a similar threat.
able to pursue a mineral withdrawal of Mojave desert tortoise critical habitat from new mining claims.
Prolonged and more frequent drought can negatively impact Mojave desert tortoise reproduction and
Mitigation funding for Mojave desert tortoise recovery actions in the region is supporting raven control strategies. A
Environmental survival. Climate change is likely to contribute to more frequent drought in the Mojave Desert. Invasion of
High focus on habitat and climate refugia could mitigate the overall impact of environmental challenges, which therefore
Risks non-native plant species is decreasing food and shelter resources for the tortoise, and growing populations
makes the spatial component critical to prioritizing conservation actions.
of predators like ravens and coyotes threaten tortoise reproductive success and survival.
Funding from federal partners is subject to appropriations and competitive grantmaking. The cost-
The partnership will seek to diversify funding sources beyond DoD to minimize dependence on any one funder, and
effectiveness of many recovery actions is not yet understood, so there is a risk of not targeting available
Financial Risks Moderate will work with partners to advance the strongest funding proposals possible to potential funders. Projects will be
funding to the most cost-effective recovery actions. Some short-term project costs, such as exclusion
geared towards, and adaptively managed, to address the highest priorities and values for recovery.
fencing material, may fluctuate.
The usefulness of this Plan will depend on its ability to fill gaps in an already robust recovery plan
architecture. It relies on collaboration between a variety of different agency partners with different land A wealth of information on which to base recovery strategies exists thanks to many years of work by USFWS, BLM,
management approaches and policies, but is founded on the understanding that the relevant work on USGS, DOD, state agencies, academics and non-profits, and this Plan seeks to operationalize that groundwork, not
Institutional Risks Low critical habitat is located almost entirely on BLM lands. Leadership of these agencies and their priorities duplicate existing efforts. If it proves difficult for NFWF to solicit enough high-quality proposals from eligible entities,
may change over the course of the implementation timeline, leading to changes in approach and policy it may be necessary to consider expanding the list of eligible entities or seek longer funding timelines from funders
within agencies. With regard to on-the-ground implementation, some key partners may be for-profit to identify projects and disburse funds.
corporations, which currently are not eligible for most NFWF funding.
Cross-jurisdictional partnerships like the RASP are designed to increase the conservation impact of ESA Section 7
Changes to the Endangered Species Act and its implementation may impact the motivation and strategies recovery actions and offer greater flexibility to federal agencies for ESA Section 7 compliance. An inventory of
Regulatory Risks Moderate
of partners. Additional capacity to complete necessary NEPA and cultural clearances may be needed. existing programmatic NEPA coverages is included in this Plan, and a RASP coordinator position has been included
to increase capacity for project-level NEPA and cultural clearances.
Range-wide monitoring efforts have not been able to collect all relevant data to inform implementation of
recovery actions. By focusing on the scale on which we measure recovery of the species, there is a risk that
Scientific Risks Low the plan may use short-term and long-term targets that are not adequate predictors of impact for range- The partnership will fund range-wide monitoring efforts to address key information gaps.
wide recovery. Because tortoises are so long-lived and many effects are not obvious, monitoring impact can
be challenging.
Strategies for route closures in the Plan take into account the need for community outreach to increase the
Off-highway vehicle (OHV) recreationists are key stakeholders in the region, and it has proven a challenge
effectiveness of this habitat restoration strategy. The Plan highlights the need to support and enhance law
Social Risks High for land managers to gain compliance from users in Mojave desert tortoise critical habitat units. Illegal
enforcement coverage, coordinating across agencies and jurisdictions, particularly with the San Bernardino County
cultivation of marijuana in the area is also a growing threat to tortoise critical habitat.
Sheriff’s Department, however no funding from the NFWF RFPs will support this.
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 19Partnership Sunsetting
This Plan was developed based on the expectation that a sustained, strategic investment could achieve
measurable progress for the Mojave desert tortoise within a 10-year time frame, during which specific
species recovery actions can be implemented, monitored, and measured for the effectiveness. Should
further or sustained conservation investment for recovery of the species be required past this period,
NFWF will work with the funding partners and other stakeholders to determine the most sustainable
path forward for Mojave desert tortoise conservation funding.
NFWF will work with the RASP partners in year 4 of the NFWF partnership to examine progress toward
the medium-term species objectives and determine what longer-term goals to set for the second 5-year
period of this 10-year Plan. In year 9 of the partnership, NFWF will work with the RASP partners to
determine next steps for tortoise recovery funding and to implement those next steps. Long-term
options may include but are not limited to a 5-year extension of the NFWF partnership to a total 15-year
term, or the establishment of a stewardship endowment managed by NFWF but directed by DoD and
partners for the long-term maintenance of recovery actions. Alternatively, should Mojave desert
tortoise populations show such significant improvement in the Western Mojave Recovery Unit, it may
be prudent to close out the funding partnership entirely, or to expand it to other recovery units beyond
the Western Mojave.
Monitoring & Evaluating Performance
To track partnership performance and conservation outcomes, NFWF will monitor progress at the
project and partnership scales. Table 3 summarizes the core metrics for tracking progress towards
stated conservation goals over the 5-year term of the RASP objectives and over the longer 10-year term
of this Plan. A detailed description of monitoring plans for population parameters including range-wide
monitoring, which was developed by Conservation Science Partners under contract with NFWF, is in
Appendix A. At the partnership scale, broader habitat and species outcomes will be monitored through
targeted grants, existing external data sources, and/or contracted entities as needed.
Table 3. Metrics for measuring progress towards conservation goals over 5 and 10 year periods (Focal
area abbreviations: FK = Fremont-Kramer; OR = Ord-Rodman; SC = Superior-Cronese)
Baseline Target Target
Goals Metrics Data source(s)
(2022) (2027) (2032)
Strategy 1: Mojave desert tortoise habitat improvement
Grantee
Protect existing # of acres acquired in 0 15,000 25,000
Habitat reporting
habitat from fee
Protection
conversion # of acres protected Grantee
0 15,000 25,000
under easement reporting
Grantee
# of acres restored 0 250,000 600,000
Habitat reporting
Improve the quality
restoration # of seedlings Grantee
and quantity of 0 2,500 5,000
and propagated reporting
functional habitat
improvement Grantee
lbs of seeds collected 0 5,000 12,000
reporting
Mojave Desert Tortoise Recovery Implementation Plan | 20You can also read
